I Love Section 230. Got a Problem With That?

Matter of Opinion

New York Times Opinion

Society & Culture, Ross Douthat, News, New York Times, Journalism

4.2 • 7.2K Ratings

🗓️ 14 January 2021

⏱️ 38 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

In this special bonus episode, Jane Coaston makes her hosting debut on “The Argument” to discuss one of her favorite subjects: Section 230. As scholar Jeff Kosseff defined it, the “26 words that created the internet,” is part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, and it protects websites from liability. The law also allows internet companies to moderate third-party content on their sites. The banning of President Trump from many social media platforms has led to renewed calls from both political parties to amend or revoke Section 230. Jane debates what changing the law might mean with Klon Kitchen, director of the Center for Technology Policy at the Heritage Foundation, and Danielle Keats Citron, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law and author of “Hate Crimes in Cyberspace.”

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Hey, argument listeners, it's Ross.
0:02.6	We've got a very special bonus episode this week about Section 230,
0:07.1	the internet law that's back in the spotlight after Facebook and Twitter banned Donald Trump.
0:12.5	Michelle and I will be with you tomorrow at the usual time,
0:15.8	but for this episode, our colleague Jane Kostin will take it from here.
0:20.1	I'm Jane Kostin and this is a special episode of the argument.
0:31.1	So, just like it started, we are in the midst of quite a week in American democracy,
0:39.5	in response to the events that took place after a number of pro-Trump forces
0:45.9	attempted to stage an insurrection slash protests on the Capitol.
0:50.5	Facebook and a number of other websites have banned Trump, including Twitter.
0:55.8	We've also seen Amazon banned the social media site Parler from its cloud services,
1:02.1	and the removal of roughly 70,000 QAnon associated accounts from Twitter.
1:07.9	So, we're seeing renewed calls to either eliminate Section 230 of the Communication Statency Act,
1:14.2	or amended protections with the argument that this is viewpoint discrimination
1:19.1	and that these companies are being protected as they discriminate against the president.
1:32.9	I think that Section 230 is awesome and perfect and great, and should not be changed,
1:38.4	and I want to stand in front of it and protect it and hold it.
1:42.3	I am libertarian, a registered libertarian, so my perspective on Section 230 is that it's a short,
1:51.5	well-written piece of legislation that has been misinterpreted, I think, purposefully.
1:56.7	My guests today don't agree with me.
1:59.7	Clawn Kitchen is the Director of Tech Policy at the Heritage Foundation.
2:03.6	It's a conservative think tank here in DC, and at the other end of the CESA is Daniel Citron,
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from New York Times Opinion, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of New York Times Opinion and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.